Invesco 的太陽能股票型指數基金（Solar ETF）和懷爾德希爾清潔能源的股票型指數基金（WilderHill Clean Energy），在所有股票型指數基金中，報酬率最好，今年迄今報酬率分別為238%和220%。將表現最好的五支ETF，是另一支ESG基金——First Trust Green Energy Index ETF,第一信託綠色能源指數ETF，報酬率亦達到186%。
ESG 投資與可持續投資，也稱為社會責任投資 （Society Responsible I），均是一種負責任的投資 （RI）。
ESG 投資尋求避免損害，而可持續投資則尋求以一般惠及所有利害關係人的方式。 迄今為止，負責任的投資和可持續投資，一直依靠一種自我定義的方法，來評估政策和運作的效果。
這種一般的質性評估，是不易精確的，使得企業之間無法進行準確的比較。這類立意良善的投資，只希望對環境或社會產生正面的影響。 因此儘管缺乏衡量標準，但尋求影響機會的大型投資集團，仍專注於負責任和可持續投資，預計2018年投資額為22萬億美元，年增長率達20%。
什麼是影響力投資？
影響力投資（Impact Investing）旨在帶來具體的解決方案，以因應影響生命和地球的挑戰。
它介於慈善事業與責任投資之間，只注重影響和盈利，而責任投資則側重於低影響的利潤。與企業永續目標或可持續投資相比，影響力投資的定義是積極和透明的衡量正面和負面影響。它要求取得可及的和具體的結果，並引導人類和地球能經歷實際的改變。
經過這些社會影響力債劵（SIBs）和環境影響力債劵（EIBs）是以達到影響力成功為回報的例子，實現了對影響力投資的量化衡量。但尚未應用於企業開展的各種活動。大投資商一直專注於投資「綠色債券」(Green Bond)，這些債券為基金公司用於為環保專案提供資金。綠色債券市場在2018年估計為3500億美元，僅2017年就籌集了1600億美元。【On impact sir Ronald Cohen】
儘管影響力投資的規模較小，但它對投資者的思維產生了顯著影響。它正引導投資者認識到，衡量所有投資類別的影響之重要性，包括但不限於負責任、可持續和綠色債券投資；並且要認識到，只有當投資者能夠以標準的方式衡量影響力時，他們才能對各種投資機會，進行真正有意義的比較。
在過去 20 年中，我們看到許多倡議的興起，旨在建立共同的基礎，以定義、衡量和評量影響力。 其中由全球影響投資指導小組（GSG）和影響管理專案（IMP）所倡導的最有希望的影響衡量方法之一：採用權衡常規財務帳戶的影響。它通過將影響係數（impact coefficients）應用於銷售、雇傭成本、銷售貨物成本，以得出受影響的加權利潤來完成；然後對資產做同樣的權衡。
目標是由影響力會計委員會，根據新的「普遍接受影響力原則」（GAIP）。設置這些影響力係數，與普遍接受的會計原則 （GAAP） 的設定方式相同。 希望不久之後，每家公司都會公佈影響力加權帳戶（impact-weighted accounts ）和財務帳戶。將影響力量化，並與實現聯合國可持續發展目標（UN SDGs）等社會目標掛勾。如果這種情況發生，影響力的考量與利潤並重。
影響力投資與 ESG 投資
雖然上述描繪出影響力投資與 ESG 投資的區別，但影響力投資通常被錯誤地，或無意地視為 ESG 投資。這次武漢肺炎（Covid-19）的大流行，加速了人們對環境、社會和治理（ESG）問題的興趣。英國《金融時報》預測，2021年這一趨勢將加劇。僅企業永續目標股票型指數基金（ESG ETF） ，資產從2019年到2020年就翻了一倍，達1200多億美元。
ESG的繁榮現在受到風險管理和行動主義的驅動——Covid-19向華爾街和世界各地的公司展示了，過去忽視所謂「外部性」（externalities）的危險。自工業革命開始以來，特別是在過去50年中，企業一直堅持不懈地關注利潤最大化和投資報酬率——金融資本——而在很大程度上忽視了自然資本、社會資本、智力資本、製造資本和人力資本對這個世界的貢獻。
弗利德曼（Milton Friedman）在1970年著名的《紐約時報雜誌》所發表關於商業社會責任的文章，對這種想法的影響，超乎各界的想像：「商業只有一個社會責任——就是利用其資源從事旨在增加利潤的活動，只要它保持在遊戲規則範圍內。這就是說，參與公開和自由的競爭，沒有欺騙或欺詐」。不幸的是，他關於企業社會責任的觀點，如此被無情地應用到如此極端，以致於許多執行者忘了公司對其他利害相關人、子孫後代和地球——而不僅僅是投資者——均負有責任。
ESG投資的未來
企業永續目標（ESG）部門面臨一些大問題，如會計缺乏一致性，各洲大陸、不同國家的政策方針不同，而過多的資金，追逐太少的可行投資商品，以及難以決定如何平衡ESG投資的"E"和"S"。 2021年可能會有一些與ESG相關的醜聞和漂綠（greenwashing）現象，但很明顯的，ESG正從邊陲轉向投資的主要舞台。
我們越早採用成功報酬（Pay-For Success）的影響力模型，建立成果基金(Outingcome funds)，以支付社會影響力債券（SIBs）、發展影響力債券（DIBs）、環境影響力債券（EIBs）等轉型工具所實現的影響，讓政府、大公司、官方發展援助機構、世界銀行集團和其他開發銀行以及慈善事業能夠更好地應對代價高昂的社會和環境問題和挑戰。
我們還應支援具有目的利潤（profit-with-purpose）的社會企業家。投資者通常認為，他們無法提供有吸引力的財務回報。實際上，有可能向服務不足的人口提供較便宜的產品和服務。與那些以更高價格為主流市場服務的人，一些已經挖掘了巨大潛在需求的人，其增長更快，盈利能力更高。 一個例子是聯合利華（Unilever）進軍印度。
雖然影響力投資和 ESG 投資可能是產生影響的方式之一，但我們所有人—— 消費者、養老金儲蓄者、慈善家、投資者、企業家、社會部門組織、政府和大公司領導——都可以採取行動，加快影響力投資革命。
想像一下，如果你能成為億萬富翁，從我們的海洋中去除塑膠，並使用它創造負擔得起的住房。
想像一下，數百萬青年企業家可以同時努力，改善嬰兒和產婦死亡率、文盲、營養不良、協助取得電力和水的機會，同時建立價值數十億美元的公司。
想像一下，投資者購買大公司的股票，主要是因為他們提供負擔得起的食品，改善服務不足的消費者的營養。
影響力革命
我們現在可以在多方面採取行動：
1.作為消費者，我們購買產品和服務，那些能幫助生命，保護我們的地球；
2.作為養老金儲蓄者、保險投保人、投資組合擁有者，我們催促我們的投資經理人，不僅進行負責任和可持續投資，而且影響力投資不低於10%；
3.作為企業家，我們發展創新業務，提供和衡量正面影響，並按照我們的價值觀進行管理；
4.作為公司的管理者和員工，我們設定影響力目標並追蹤目標；
5.作為公民，我們遊說我們的政府，鼓勵和授權投資者和企業，根據風險-報酬-影響力做出決策； 採用共同影響會計和報告標準；將銀行、保險公司和投資基金中的無人認領資產，直接用於影響資本供應商；
6.作為慈善組織、政府、大公司、官方發展援助機構、世界銀行集團和其他開發銀行，我們設立成果基金，以支付SIBs、DIBs和EIBs所取得的成果。
你可以做這些事，來改變這個世界。
作者原文：Impact Investing: How Your Investment Change the World?
In recent years, ESG Investing has garnered more and more investor attention and finally in 2020, it has become the rage of the investment community. Invesco’s Solar ETF and WilderHill Clean Energy ETF fetched the best returns amongst all ETF funds, returning 238% and 220% year to date, respectively. Rounding out the top five performing ETFs is another ESG fund – First Trust Green Energy Index ETF, returning 186%.
ESG Investing – along with Sustainable Investing which is also known as Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) -- is one kind of Responsible Investing (RI). ESG Investing seeks to avoid harm while Sustainable Investment seeks to benefit all stakeholders in a general way. To date, Responsible Investing and Sustainable Investment have relied on a self-defined approach to assess the effect of policies and practices. This general, qualitative assessment is imprecise and makes accurate comparison between businesses impossible. This kind of well-intended investing only hopes to make positive environmental or social impact. Despite this lack of measurement, large investment groups in search of impact opportunities have focused on Responsible and Sustainable Investment estimated to be at US$22 trillion in 2018 and growing at 20% a year.
What is Impact Investing?
Impact Investing aims to bring specific solutions to meet the challenges affecting lives and the planet. It sits somewhere between philanthropy which focuses only on impact and responsible investing which focuses on profit with low impact. In contrast to ESG or Sustainable Investing, Impact Investing is defined by vigorous and transparent measurement of both positive and negative impact. It demands tangible and concrete results and leads to actual change experienced by people and the planet.
Quantitative measurement of impact has been achieved in pay-for-success interventions such as social impact bonds but has yet been applied to businesses that have varied activities. Big investors have focused on investing in ‘green bonds’, which fund companies spending on environmentally friendly projects. The green bond market is estimated at US$350 billion in 2018 with US$160 billion raised in 2017 alone.
Despite Impact Investing’s smaller size, it is significantly influencing investor thinking. It is leading investors to realize the importance of measuring impact across all investment categories, including but not limited to Responsible, Sustainable and Green Bond investment; and to appreciate that only when investors can measure impact in a standard way, they can make really meaningful comparisons between various investment opportunities.
Over the last 20 years, we have seen the rise of numerous initiatives to establish shared fundamentals for defining, measuring, and quantifying impact. One of the most promising impact measurement approaches, advocated by The Global Steering Group for Impact Investment (GSG) and the Impact Management Project (IMP), involves weighing conventional financial accounts for impact. It is done by applying impact coefficients to sales, employment costs, cost of goods sold to arrive at an impacted-weighted profit; and then doing the same for assets.
The aim is for these impact coefficients to be set by an Impact Accounting Board according to the new Generally Accepted Impact Principles (GAIP), in the same way that Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) are set. It is hoped that before long, every company will publish impact-weighted accounts alongside its financial ones. Net impacts will be quantified and tied to the achievement of social goals such as the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). If this happens, impact will assume its rightful place alongside profit in decision-making.
Impact Investing vs. ESG Investing
While the above draws the distinction between Impact vs. ESG Investing, Impact Investing is often mistakenly or inadvertently treated the same as ESG Investing. The Covid-19 pandemic has accelerated interest in environment, social, and governance (ESG) issues in 2020, and Financial Times predicts that this will intensify in 2021. ESG ETF assets alone have doubled in 2020 from 2019 to more than US$120 billion.
The ESG boom is now driven as much by risk management as activism – Covid-19 has shown Wall Street and companies around the world the dangers of ignoring so-called “externalities”. Since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution and especially during the last 50 years, companies have focused relentlessly on profit maximization and investor returns – financial capital -- while largely ignoring natural capital, social capital, intellectual capital, manufacturing capital, and human capital’s contribution to our world.
Milton Friedman’s famous New York Times Magazine article in 1970 on Social Responsibility of Business has more influence on this thinking than anything else imaginable: “There is one and only one social responsibility of business – to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud.” Unfortunately, his view on corporate social responsibility has been carried out so relentlessly and to such an extreme that many executives have forgotten that corporations have responsibility to other stakeholders, future generations, and the planet -- not just investors.
The Future of ESG Investing
There are big problems facing the ESG sector such as a lack of accounting consistency, different policy approaches amongst different continents/countries, too much money chasing too few viable investment products, and the difficulty of deciding how to balance the “E” against the “S” of ESG investing. There will probably be some ESG-related scandals and greenwashing in 2021, but it is clear that ESG is moving from the margins to the main stage in investing.
The sooner we come together to adopt pay-for-success impact models by establishing Outcome Funds to pay for the impact achieved by transformational tools such as Social Impact Bonds (SIBs), Development Impact Bonds (SIBs), Environmental Impact Bonds (EIBs), the better we – governments, big companies, official development aid agencies, the World Bank Group and other development banks, and philanthropies – can address costly social and environmental problems and challenges.
We should also support social entrepreneurs who are profit-with-purpose entrepreneurs. Investors generally assume that they cannot deliver attractive financial returns. In reality, it is possible to supply cheaper products and services to underserved populations. Some of those who have tapped into huge latent demand have met with faster growth and higher profitability than those that serve mainstream markets at higher prices. An example is Unilever’s foray into India.
While Impact and ESG Investing may be one way to have impact, all of us -- consumers, pension savers, philanthropists, investors, entrepreneurs, social sector organizations, governments, and big company leaders -- can act to speed the impact investment revolution. Imagine if you could become a billionaire by removing plastic from our oceans and using it to create affordable housing. Imagine millions of young entrepreneurs could work on improving infant and maternal mortality, illiteracy, malnutrition, access to electricity and water while building billion dollar companies at the same time. Imagine investors buying shares in big companies mainly because they deliver affordable food products that improve the nutrition of underserved consumers. Imagine governments only spending money on programs that work.
Impact Revolution
We can act now on multiple fronts to advance the Impact Revolution as follows:
As consumers, we buy products and services that help improve lives and protect our planet;
As pension savers, insurance policy holders, investment portfolio owners, we push our investment managers to make not only Responsible and Sustainable Investments, but also Impact Investments of not less than 10%;
As entrepreneurs, we develop innovative businesses that deliver and measure positive impact and run them in a way consistent with our values;
As managers and employees of companies, we set impact objectives and track them;
As citizens, we lobby our governments to encourage and mandate investors and businesses to make decision based on risk-return-impact; adopt common impact accounting and reporting standards; and direct unclaimed assets in banks, insurance companies, and investment funds to Impact Capital providers; and
As philanthropies, governments, big companies, official development aid agencies, the World Bank Group and other development banks, we establish Outcome Funds to pay for the impact achieved by SIBs, DIBs, and EIBs.
.jpg)